Skip to main content

tv   The Reid Out  MSNBC  January 29, 2024 4:00pm-5:00pm PST

4:00 pm
in the way of serving the music community. you can appreciate this. we need music now more than ever. the healing power, the unifying power. what music can do is magic. we need to make sure creators are enabled and protected and have thriving space to do what they do. >> i love that. and you're absolutely right. we need that and we need it in our public life and our culture across the globe, to have time and places to come together and think about what unites us, what we share, how we learn from each other, which i think our news viewers know is a little different than some of the other daily discourse and fights we're also having. harvey mason jr., thanks for reminding us of all that and good luck. >> thanks. great to be on "the beat." >> great to have harvey. we'll be watching the grammys, but keep it locked to watch "the reidout," which starts now. tonight on "the reidout" --
4:01 pm
>> we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. we must guard against the acquisition of unwanted influence by the military industrial complex. >> 63 years after president eisenhower's farewell speech, those words are coming back to haunt us, with fears growing of a regional war in the middle east. also tonight, e. jean carroll speaks out for the first time since the $83 million verdict against donald trump. trump doesn't even pay his lawyers, so how likely is it that ms. carroll will ever see that money? plus, infrastructure and chips and science are among president biden's biggest accomplishments. now, republicans are shamelessly trying to take credit for policies they voted against. but we begin tonight with the growing threat of a regional
4:02 pm
war in the middle east. over the weekend, three u.s. service members were killed and more than 40 injured in an attack on a military base in northeast jordan near the syrian border. late today, the defense department released the identities of the three u.s. army reserve soldiers. they are sergeant william jerome rivers, specialist breonna moffitt, and specialist kennedy sanders. all from georgia. they are the first u.s. deaths in months of strikes by iranian-backed militant groups since the israel/hamas war started in october. u.s. central command says the attack happened at a remote base on the border with syria and iraq called tower 22. the white house is blaming an iran-backed militia with president biden vowing that the u.s. will respond. donald trump, of course, pounced on the attack, portraying it as a consequence of joe biden's weakness and surrender. and the hawks in his party are
4:03 pm
pressing biden to target iran directly over the soldiers' deaths. senator tom cotton, who let's not forget, once advocated for the deployment of the military against black lives matter protesters, released a statement about the jordan attack saying, the only answer to these attacks must be devastating military retaliation against iran's terrorist forces, both in iran and across the middle east. while mitch mcconnell said, quote, our enemies remain emboldened until, quote, the united states imposes serious crippling costs. lindsey graham was more candid, tweeting hit iran now. hit them hard. that's also weighed in. >> if there were ever a moment now when to show american determination and take a significant step to reestablish deterrence, the president's response has to be to strike targets in iran.
4:04 pm
we have to impose enough pain on iran that it outweighs what they have done to us. >> first strike that hit, you punch and you punch back hard. what they should be doing is going after every ounce of production of those missiles wherever those missiles are, you take that out. >> the right's desire to bomb iran is not new. but there's also a history. in fact, a bipartisan history of american presidents sometimes choosing caution when it comes to engaging militarily in the region. that's not always the case, of course. hello, george bush and george w. bush. but there are some significant historical reminders. take president ronald reagan. who in 1982 sent u.s. marines on a peace keeping mission to lebanon, a country rocked by civil war. the following year, a truck filled with explosives drove into the u.s. military compound near beirut airport and detonated, killing 241 service members, including 220 marines.
4:05 pm
it was a military and political disaster for the new president, just two years into his first term. and yet, months later, reagan announced the marines would withdraw offshore. a decision critics at the time said was a failure to stand firm against terrorism. more recently in 2013, when the u.s. was roiled by the debate over how to respond to the syrian government's use of chemical weapons in that country's civil war, an act that president barack obama had declared a red line beforehand, obama nevertheless resisted. to the end, the military intervention in syria. ben rhodes, deputy national security adviser for president obama wrote about the red line crisis inside the white house. in describing a pivotal moment in the oval office, rhodes wrote, quote, in the decades since 9/11, we have gone to war in afghanistan, iraq, yemen, somalia, and libya. now there was a demand we go into syria. next, it would be iran.
4:06 pm
it is too easy for a president to go to war. president obama said. that quote from me in 2007, i agree with that guy. that's who i am. and sometimes the least obvious thing to do is the right thing. joining me now is ben rhodes, former deputy national security adviser for president barack obama and cohost of the pod save the world podcast. and niera hawk, a former state department senior adviser and former white house senior director. thank you both for being here. ben, i will start with you. this drum beat once again from some of the usual suspects thinking lindsey graham in the wake of this horrible -- the horrible deaths of these three army u.s. army members. your thoughts on that. >> well, i mean, there hasn't been a problem that lindsey graham hasn't identified the solution as bombing iran for a long time in the middle east. i think if we step back from this, there's some things we have to bear in mind. what has put our troops at risk
4:07 pm
is the escalation in the middle east. it's the escalation in the last three months. obviously, centered in the war in gaza since october 7th, but also the violence we have seen across the region. and the deeper the united states gets itself into this kind of game of quicksand and tit for tat with these different proxies across the region, the more dangerous it's going to be for u.s. service members. so if you're not going to de-escalate, what you're doing is bringing more risk to the u.s. troops that are in the region and more risk that we're going to get even deeper into a regional war. that's leads to the iran point. it's not a video game. the way these people talk about these things. it's as if we're going to sit here in washington and we're going to talk tough and then we're going to hit some stuff in the middle east and there are not going to be consequences. a war with iran is a big piece of business. i don't think the american people are signed up for that. it could have huge consequences for inflaming an already inflamed region. it could lead to huge consequences for our service members who are the ones who are put at risk in the region.
4:08 pm
it could have huge consequences for the global economy. in terms of disruptions. if you think the disruptions in the red sea are difficult for supply lines, wait until there's a full-scale war between the united states and iran that engulfed the entire region. they're not even thinking this through at all. right now, you have to take a step back and realize it's the pathway of escalation that has continually got us in trouble. whether it was going into the war in iraq without any plan. whether it was donald trump pulling out of an iran nuclear deal that was working. or whether it's falling into this trap where you have groups that are trying to pick a fight with the united states. i think when someone is trying to pick a fight with you, why would you give them exactly what they want? there are ways in which we can try to protect our service members and our presence in the region without succumbing to this quickstand that is pulling us back into a war i don't think the american people want either. so there has to be a place for diplomacy. has to be a place to reject this nonsense advice we have been
4:09 pm
hearing for 20 years now and it doesn't work. >> let me play just to give you all sort of a flavor of this, how how this has sounded, because you're right, this drum beat for war, specifically with iran, which let's be clear, ain't iraq, and we couldn't get through that without, you know, we didn't have a clear victory there, and also managed to create isis in the process. here is how people like dick cheney, the late john mccain, and tom cotton have been over the years talking about iran. >> my belief always was we needed to keep the military option on the table. >> beach boys song, bomb iran. bomb bomb bomb. anyway. >> it would be something more along the lines of what president clinton did during operation desert fox. several days of air and naval bombing against iraq. >> we likewise must work to collapse the iranian regime that oppresses its people and seeks to sow terror all over the
4:10 pm
world. >> sink their navy, destroy their air force, and deliver a decisive blow to the revolutionary guard. in other words, neuter that regime. >> easy for them to say. they wouldn't have to do it themselves. >> oh, let's just look at the fact that the faces that you showed of the service members who were killed in action, they're all black. and not a single person advocating in that video is a black person. in fact, probably none of them would actually have been drafted or had to voluntarily serve in the military because of the military benefits of education and basic standard of living that you can get if you are the 40% of the military that is made up of people of color or the other rank and file members who are made up of people from lower socioeconomic classes. our all volunteer military is amazing, but it also puts the burden of who has to serve out the chicken hawk policy recommendations.
4:11 pm
it's not the people who get to sit in the rooms and debate about whether or not the united states can go at it with iran. there are so many other tools in the national security tool kit, and the republican party is out of not only what is recommended by those who serve and the generals who command them, but they're also out of step with what their own rank and file members would want. nobody in the american public right now wants to see the united states involved in another 20-year forever war. >> you know, the challenge, ben, of course, is that the disruption of shipping in the red sea is an economic problem ultimately and it's one that could impact president biden's re-election and obviously the economy. so there's a lot of incentive to somehow make that stop. but these iran-backed groups are still hitting the united states, hitting the united states targets, positions i should say, and hitting red sea shipping because of what's happening in gaza. there is apparently another
4:12 pm
attempt to get a cease-fire deal, a temporary cease-fire deal that would involve returning all the hostages. hamas is resisting that because they want a permanent cease-fire. what do you make of all that happening at the same time you have these, you know, living room hawks pushing for a wider war? >> i want to say a couple things about this. the first thing we don't repeat enough, in addition to the extraordinary costs, nothing has emboldened iran and strengthened its position in the middle east more than the u.s.-led war on iraq. that removed a big adversary of iran, opened the door to a government they had a lot of influence in. all these militias are an outgrowth that a lot of those same people supported. in the obama administration, we made a mistake, can believe, in terms of supporting a saudi-led war in yemen against the houthis who were backed by the iranians. the houthis in iran were not weakened by that war.
4:13 pm
they frankly emerged more resilient on the other end. i think the idea that you're going to defeat the houthis when they live in yemen. that's where they're from. they're not going anywhere. they want to beat the vanguard of opposing the united states and israel in the region at a time of this war in gaza. the only pathway to de-escalation, we may not like it. i certainly don't think these groups -- they do terrible things. they engage in terrorism, in violence, but the reality is, they're doing this post-october 7th because they want to be a part of what they see as this war where they're attracting popularity and attention from around the world. and so the only pathway to security is to de-escalate the broader conflict. so a pathway to a cease-fire in gaza is both about protecting the people of gaza who are suffering horrendous catastrophe. i also believe in the long term interest of israel to not be trying to flatten gaza and not be isolated itself internationally. regionally, when you see this urgency of the united states trying to work with egypt and
4:14 pm
qatar and israel, it's because they know the only way you get the hostages home is if you stop the fighting. you don't rescue a hostage with a 2,000-pound bomb. the only way to calm tensions is not by having more war and more enemies. we have seen where that leads. that leads to more violence. there has to be a diplomatic process. i think it's good you see this urgency because people in the region know this is a recipe for more disaster. >> the houthis are named after a man, houthi is the last name, not an ethnic group. they're from yemen. go ahead. >> joy, i was going to piggyback off what you and ben have been saying. who else in the region knows what's at stake here? the people in israel who they have all themselves as adults had to volunteer in the army. they know that their president right now is not prioritizing getting the hostages back. the last thing that they want is to see an escalation with iran on top of and opening up another
4:15 pm
front of war for right now the very fragile state of israel. it does not help the united states allies, it does not help the united states project of promoting democracy throughout the middle east. to be escalating this war directly into iran, especially when the united states has the opportunity to attack targets elsewhere and send strong messages in other ways. >> yeah. president eisenhower said it well, the military industrial complex creates a constant continual incentive for war, and i think president obama was right, we have to wean people off this idea that politicians off this idea that war is the answer to everything. there is an industrial military industry component to it, an armchair hawk component to it. it doesn't solve anything. ben and niera. thank you both. up next on "the reidout," e. jean carroll is speaking out about her legal defeat of donald trump who now owes her a whopping $83 million. what are the chances she will actually collect from the man who notoriously has throughout
4:16 pm
his life skipped out on his bills? and what can be done to make sure he pays up? "the reidout" continues after this. this
4:17 pm
the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. and it could strike at any time. think you're not at risk? wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. ♪ ♪
4:18 pm
i got the power of 3. i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. i'm under 7. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. i'm lowering my risk. adults lost up to 14 pounds. i lost some weight. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. living with type 2 diabetes? ask about the power of 3 with ozempic®.
4:19 pm
4:20 pm
i had been prepared for the worst force, you know, on the earth today, the most powerful, the most effective, the most money, the richest, the most, you know, and there he is.
4:21 pm
he's nothing. he's just the people around him who give him the power. it's the emperor without clothes. i would like to give the money to something donald trump hates. perhaps a fund for the women who have been sexually assaulted by donald trump. >> today, we are hearing from writer e. jean carroll for the first time since a jury ordered donald trump to pay her north of $83 million in defamation damages. that's on top of the $5 million a separate new york jury ordered trump to pay carroll last year in her first civil defamation trial against the man who was found liable for sexually assaulting her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s. perhaps this jury found the magic number that will shut trump up. because unlike the first trial, which did not stop trump's attacks on e. jean carroll. he's been relatively quiet on social media and the campaign trail about the second one. over the weekend, trump shared just two articles about carroll
4:22 pm
and the trial. but given that she's breaking her silence and knowing trump's track record, how long before the attacks start up again? joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney, professor at the university of alabama school of law, and an msnbc legal analyst and friend of the show. let's talk about that number. is that the idea of punitive damages? is it to make the person stop, and if he stops, does that speak to the success of the damage amount? >> yeah, it's an interesting question, joy, because punitive damages are intended to both punish a defendant for what they have done when it's been malicious and intentional, and also to try to compel them to stop as best as possibly can be done. this number here seems to have been effective, but whether it keeps trump from continuing to defame e. jean carroll, it at least punishes him. >> yeah. amen to that. let's talk about how e. jean carroll could collect the money so she can start this fund for
4:23 pm
trump's, what, 23, 25, 26 other named victims that we know of. here are the options. "new york times" reports on how e. jean carroll could collect her full $83.3 million. number one, mr. trump could pay the $83.3 million to the court, which will hold the money while he's appealing. he has to file a bond because he wants to appeal. he could pay it so they could hold it. or trump could try to secure a bond which will save him from having to pay the full amount up front. a bond might require him to pay a deposit and offer collateral and would come with interest and fees. it would also require mr. trump to find a financial institution willing to lend him a large sum of money at a time when he is in significant legal jeopardy. why does there need to be a bond if he's appealing? and how does the court go about collecting the $83.3 million to hold it? >> yeah, the basic idea here is that the burden is on the party who loses in the trial court if they want to take an appeal,
4:24 pm
they have got to pay into the court fund either a bond or the full amount plus some interest in order to be able to take an appeal. you sort of have to pay to play, to misuse a phrase that's used in other contexts. so trump has that decision. if he wants to appeal, he can either obtain a traditional bond or pay in. joy, it's really interesting to note that when he lost the first judgment against e. jean carroll, he did not get an appeal bond. he paid the full amount of that judgment plus an add-on to represent future interests. and then he took his appeal. no word on whether that was because he was unable to get a traditional bond or whether he thought this was a better sort of approach for him. maybe he had an extra $6 million kicking around that he didn't mind getting rid of. but either way, that gets a little more difficult when you're looking at $83.3 million. >> yeah, i don't know if his friends on deutsche bank are still there to lend him more
4:25 pm
money. donald trump, this may just be the beginning of the money he owes or would have to put up bonds for. there's a $370 million ask that letitia james the new york a.g. is making. that's how much she is seeking. that could go north of that as well. let's say he ends up being due another $370 million. and then he has to pay the $5 million and the $83.3 million. is there an order that those who have won judgments against him go in? who takes precedence to get paid first? >> yeah, it's a great question. it will have to do with the time that judgments were entered and also, you know, if we were getting to a bankruptcy situation, which doesn't seem where trump is right now, but then there's a certainly prioritization for creditors. i think right now, e. jean carroll is in line behind people who have judgments ahead of her or debts ahead of her, and in front, perhaps, of letitia james' claim.
4:26 pm
>> since i have a little more time with you, what do you make of how long it's taking for the d.c. circuit to come back with their decision on donald trump's absolute immunity claim? should we be worried it's taking so long? >> so, you know, it's tough to know. the clock is obviously ticking. everyone had hoped to see a quick decision. but you got three judges, one of the priorities that judges often set when they're making an appellate decision is reaching some sort of unanimity, not just about the decision but about the analysis that leads them to that decision. so it's possible that the judges are trying to work out some differences and come to agreement. that, of course, can make an opinion stronger, make something stronger when it goes up on appeal. either for consideration or to the supreme court, so it may be a matter of an extra few days to get what's ultimately a judgment that's more readily affirmable on appeal. >> i always learn so much from
4:27 pm
you, joyce vance. like taking my own little law school course when you're on. always appreciate you being here. and be sure to tune in tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern when e. jean carroll herself joins the great rachel maddow. you will not want to miss that conversation. i'll certainly be there listening with you. up next on "the reidout," there's nothing slimier than members of congress taking credit for stuff they voted against. but for this republican-led do-nothing congress, that's pretty much their only option. we'll be right back.
4:28 pm
4:29 pm
4:30 pm
4:31 pm
not just any whiteboard... ...katie porter's whiteboard is one way she's: [news anchor] ...often seen grilling top executives of banks, big pharma, even top administration officials. katie porter. never taken corporate pac money - never will. leading the fight to ban congressional stock trading. and the only democrat who opposed wasteful “earmarks” that fund politicians' pet projects. katie porter. focused on your challenges - from lowering housing costs to fighting climate change. shake up the senate - with democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message.
4:32 pm
if you have been paying attention to politics, it's become pretty clear that the republican party isn't actually good at delivering for the american people. the best thang could die when they had control of the house, the senate, and the white house was a giant enormous tax cut for corporations and the mega rich. right now, republicans are so bad at legislating, even they're insulting how unproductive their congress is. it's so bad, the current congress, the 118th, has been ranked as one of the most unproductive congresses in decades. i mean, republicans are so bad at their jobs that they're now taking credit for things that democrats passed and that they voted against. in an interview on cbs news miami with veteran journalist, miami congresswoman maria salazar got a case of amnesia when asked about her vote against legislation including
4:33 pm
the chips and science act and the consolidated appropriations act of 2023. spending she publicly took credit for in her community. >> last month, you were at fiu, and you presented a check for $650,000 to help small businesses at fiu, but you voted against the bill that gave the money that you then signed a check for and handed and had a photo op.consolidated appropria act. you voted against that bill? >> right now, you have to give me more details but every time i have an opportunity to bring money to my constituents, i do so. i just did $400,000. but look -- >> you voted against the chips and science act, right? >> listen, right now, i need to ask my staff. >> you voted against the infrastructure bill, and you talk about all the money that comes back to the airport. so at the same time that you're taking credit for the money that
4:34 pm
you bring back to the district in washington, you're voting against these projects on party line votes. >> listen, that was i think last cycle. i cannot really remember right now. >> if, see what had happened was was a person -- >> representative salazar is not the only one. this is now a thing for republicans. for example, minnesota congressman pete starr has been out there claiming bragging rights for bills he didn't actually vote for. last week, president biden announced nearly $5 billion in federal money for a bridge connecting minnesota and wisconsin. and dozens of other infrastructure project nationwide, funding made possible by the infrastructure investment and jobs act. if you listen to the congressman, you would think this funding was only possible because of him. >> securing the money to help replace this bridge has long been a priority of mine and i'm proud to have helped deliver over $1 billion in federal funds to the northland. >> fact check.
4:35 pm
actually, the funding happened in spite of him. he voted against the infrastructure bill. and he defended that decision at the time by saying, and i quote, i will not be complicit in paving a destructive and irreversible path toward socialism. the massive spending package is not about real infrastructure. and yet there he is, standing in front of a bridge that got millions of dollars for a makeover. how is that socialism tasting these days, buddy? if you take a beat and look at the republican party as a whole, you will notice they're very good at complaining and really bad at legislating. take for example immigration. that's all they talk about. they repeat over and over again their white nationalist talking points about a massive invasion of illegal aliens who are coming to destroid america. it's so bad they literally seem to be spoiling for a second civil war and are caterwauling on right wing media about facing
4:36 pm
down federal troops over the border. according to republicans, this is an emergency that needs an immediate solution or america as we know it will be over. so why not fix it? i mean, these people are actually in government in a position to fix it, right? well, fixing things isn't actually the point for them. you know how i know? because the republican party just censured someone who dared to work with democrats to find a solution to the border. sound unhinged, right? it is. after the break, i'll tell you which maga republican got that treatment.
4:37 pm
detect this: living with hiv, robert learned he can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why he switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: marnina learned that most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: you could stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about dovato.
4:38 pm
- "best thing i've ever done." that's what freddie told me. - it was the best thing i've ever done, and- - really? - yes, without a doubt! - i don't have any anxiety about money anymore. - great people. different people, that's for sure, and all of them had different reasons for getting a reverse mortgage, but you know what, they all felt the same about two things: they all loved their home, and they all wanted to stay in that home. and they all wanted to stay in that home. - [announcer] if you're 62 or older and own your home,
4:39 pm
you could access your equity to improve your lifestyle. a reverse mortgage loan eliminates your monthly mortgage payments and puts tax-free cash in your pocket. call the number on your screen. - why don't you call aag... and find out what a reverse mortgage can mean for you? - [announcer] call right now to receive your free no-obligation info kit. call the number on your screen.
4:40 pm
♪♪ no. ♪♪ -no. -nuh-uh. ♪♪ yeah. oh. yes. ♪♪ oh yeah. yes. isn't this great? yeeaahhhh!! ♪♪ yeah, i could do a cartwheel in here. oh hey! would you like to join us? no. we would love to join you. ♪♪
4:41 pm
. congressional republicans love to latch on to president biden and democrats' successful policies and take credit for things they didn't do while tying themselves into pretzels to do nothing for the american people. fixing what they say is a crisis at the border with congressional negotiators continuing work on a bipartisan deal to tie border policies to funding for ukraine. president biden said he's ready to take action if congress is serious about solving the issue. >> if that bill were the law today, i would shut down the border now. congress needs to get it done. >>. >> donald trump still trying to kill the deal. he bragged about blocking progress and said, please, please, blame him if it fails. meanwhile, the main republican negotiator on border security, oklahoma senator james lankford
4:42 pm
is defending the proposed deal and called out fellow republicans who oppose it. >> it is interesting, the republicans four months ago would not give funding for ukraine for israel and for our southern border because we demanded changes in policy so we actually locked arms together and said we're not going to give you money for this. we want a change in law. now it's interesting a few months later, oh, just kidding, i actually don't want a change in law because it's a presidential election year. >> so what was senator langford -- what has senator langford gotten for his efforts to solve what his party insists is a crisis. the oklahoma party has voted to condemn and censure langford for working with democrats. joining me is jasmine crockett of texas, and stuart stevens, senior adviser to the lincoln project. i'm going to start with you, congresswoman crockett. it's your state that is home to the governor, who has essentially dared the federal government to come down and enforce federal border policy. so it is portrayed, i just want
4:43 pm
you to confirm, as an absolute urgent crisis, no? >> oh, absolutely. it's an invasion, joy. it's an invasion, honey. so yeah, we know that this is what they're saying out loud, but this is because people such as chip roy have made it very clear they have nothing to campaign on. so therefore, they have found that this is their chance. they're able to use democratic governors and democratic senators -- i'm sorry, mayors to say listen, everybody agrees. even the democrats, right? so here it is, we can have a solution, but we know the solution is not what they want. all they want is rhetoric so they can campaign. >> and you know, stuart, now you have donald trump saying hey, blame me. he wants the blame. he wants the credit, i guess you could call it on the republican side for killing a deal, and republicans have responded in oklahoma by literally censuring senator langford for doing nothing other than working on this bill. your thoughts. >> this is not a serious party.
4:44 pm
what gets lost in all this is the scope of the humage tragedy involved both on the border and in ukraine. it's not an exaggeration that people are dying every hour because of this. it's not some theoretical game, not like debating a law that's going to go into effect 20 years from now. this is real stuff and why you actually have a government, and you elect people to make tough decisions. and you know, we have this massive budget. we have the largest military combined with one of the largest military budgets in the world. we can afford to do both. this is a false charge and a false choice. it's really just extraordinary for a lot of us who worked in the republican party to see what is de facto aiding and abetting vladimir putin winning the largest land war in europe since world war ii. >> and congresswoman crockett, so the republicans are saying that what they want is what they passed, hr-2, which would
4:45 pm
significantly restrict asylum, it would do remain in mexico and other things, defund the ngos providing assistance to migrants. the senate bill which is different from that, you get the sense, let's say the senate for whatever reason decided to do hr-2 and send it right back to the house. would republicans vote for that? >> no, absolutely not because their leader has told them that they can't do it. you know, i thought that we lived in a country in which we had a democracy and we had three coequal branches of government, but right now, it is clear that we have a leader over the legislative republicans and that leader isn't even an elected official. this is what we're dealing with. so when people want to blame democrats, when they head to the polls in november, the republicans are saying that's exactly what we want you to do, but the reality is that democrats have been the ones that have always been the adults in the room, especially this session, that have said listen, we understand what it means to govern. that means we don't necessarily
4:46 pm
get everything we want. but we want to make sure that we are making some sort of progress and we're bettering the lives of american people. so we're always willing and ready to work. they are not. this is why this is the most unproductive congress that we have had in modern day history, and i do want to pick up on a point that i don't think we're emphasizing enough. this is the pro-putin caucus. full stop. that's what they are. and the fact that we have people that are agreeing to and allowing a dictator like putin to do the things that are absolutely in opposition to democracy, tells you how far we have come in this country and it also tells you of the threat that we have in this country as it relates to democracy because they are failing to respect the very principles that this country allegedly was built upon. >> you know, and stuart, part of what they're now saying they're going to do, their proactive action is to try to impeach
4:47 pm
homeland security mayorkas, but it seems like the republican parties are trapped between the two things they want most, whatever donald trump wants, which is for putin to win, and a border -- the border to i guess, i don't know, to be the spark of a civil war. it's not clear if there's a policy they want other than putin winning and i guess a civil war. >> you know, we shouldn't forget that this was donald trump's main campaign issue when he ran for president the first time. and was elected. and he failed. he failed on the border more than any president in history. you know, the wall that mexico was going to build, all of this, that's the reason this is a biden problem now. because trump failed to address this problem. and you know, what really is just so striking to a lot of us who worked in the republican party, the essence of living in a totalitarian society is you can't say what you know is true and what you believe because it's unacceptable. and if you held a gun to the head and a lie detector test to
4:48 pm
most of these republicans, they would vote for ukraine overwhelmingly. and they would vote to do something about the border. but they're caught in this orwellian world in which they can't tell the truth, they can't be the people they would like to be, and instead, it's who they are, and it's a complete moral collapse of what it means to be an american. >> and congresswoman, it's hard to argue with that. have any of your colleagues on the other side explained why they didn't solve the border when they had what they claimed was the greatest president in history and all three branches of government under their control? >> absolutely not. but you know, when it comes to policy, you're not getting very much policy out of the republicans nowadays. and unfortunately, we end up in this cycle where it's a matter of, you know what, we will trust the republicans because we think they're better on the economy. we think they're better on border security. we think they're better on all these things, and then everything goes bad, and then
4:49 pm
they say, you know what, let's just go ahead and see what the democrats can do, because we can't do any worse. then the democrats come in and they clean it up, right now, we have an economy that is thriving, i know that not everyone feels it at this exact moment, but by every metric, the economy is doing well. we are hitting record highs as it relates to the stock market and so with that being said, trust democrats. we will get it done for you. >> yeah, and republicans will complain about it a lot. congresswoman jasmine crockett and stewart steves, thank you. still ahead, the right tries to turn air travel into a new dei battleground and i'm fighting back with facts. stay with us. acts stay with us lost in investment research. get help with j.p morgan personal advisors. hey, david! ready to get started? work with advisors who create a plan with you, and help you find the right investments. so great getting to know you, let's take a look at your new investment plan.
4:50 pm
ok, great! this should have you moving in the right direction. thanks jen. get ongoing advice; and manage your investments in the chase mobile app. with the majority of my patients with sensitivity i see irritated gums and weak enamel. sensodyne sensitivity gum and enamel it relieves sensitivity helps restore gum health and rehardens enamel. i am a big advocate of recommending things that i know work. at bombas, we're obsessed with comfort. softness. quality. because your basic things should be your best things. one purchased equals one donated. visit bombas.com and get 20% off your first order. the rights obsession with
4:51 pm
4:52 pm
4:53 pm
affirmative action, which became their obsession with critical race theory, which devolved into their obsession with the i, i mean, can we just
4:54 pm
call it an active obsession with black people already? soaring to new hats, or accurately sinking two new lows. and the latest target and the war against horrible diversity is airlines. after a series of safety incidents on commercial planes, including the alaska airlines flight where a door plug blew off a boeing jet midair, the conservative media ecosystem has decided the sole cause of it all is the fact that airlines are hiring black people. republican congressman matt gaetz and andy biggs, along with elon musk, and executive failed some donald trump jr., all posting without evidence about how law dei is destroying airlines and making flying less safe. commentator candace owens, who never misses a grift, i mean, an opportunity to attack black people, adding that she wouldn't trust a woman to fly a plane either. >> i would be terrified if i got onto a plane and i saw a woman flying the plane. and i know that we had the united ceo saying that he just
4:55 pm
wants to fulfill a quota. he just wants there to be more women, more black people. he's not concerned at first with qualifications. >> perhaps the most egregious example came from turning point usa founder, charlie kirk, who didn't even try to hide the racism. >> i'm sorry. if i see a black pilot, i'm gonna be, boy, i hope he's qualified. >> well, someone who actually knows a thing or two about flying planes, former navy intelligence officer clapped back at charlie in a threads post, writing, this is lieutenant commander smith, he was awarded the air medal by the president for his actions after the arresting cable snapped, sending his plane off the deck. it was his superior airmanship that saved not only his aircraft but the lives of his crew. he also happened to be black. joining me now is former fbi double agent and host of newsweek's unconventional. i know you and i texted about
4:56 pm
this after charlie kirk made his comment, which we would characterize as his comment. your thoughts on this idea that the problem with airlines is the black? >> it's so absurd. i don't even know how to even directly answer that, other than to say, look, there is an insidious approach to this and i'm wearing this little pin on my jacket here. to me, it signifies being an intelligence officer, something ironed. being a person of color, joy, i'm a man of certain age, i spent a lot of time being the only person that looks like being in those rooms. with kirk and candace owens, what they're doing, it's essentially saying that credentials that people of color, woman of color, who have earned these credentials, it doesn't matter. because we need to judge them by the color of their skin. this is exactly what martin luther king, you know, spoke out against. so, it is so absurd to say that someone is not qualified to fly a plane, telling lieutenant councilman, one of the many
4:57 pm
examples that we can bring out to show that it's absolutely not true, of course. >> and we shouldn't have to defend the idea of black people being pirate pilots. a third of pilots are former military people, the military bringing in people who don't know what they're doing. and we actually, i asked my producer, just go back through to see how many of the airline crashes in the 21st century involved pilots who were black. the answer is none. zero. all of the known air catastrophes that have happened in this century, the pilot happened to be white. but that doesn't mean that when you say a white pilot, or a pilot who looks like charlie kirk, he should also be afraid. but that happens to be the statistical reality. >> joy, i had a chance to fly on that -- the young senior airman, the person who was in charge of literally making sure that i was safe, putting my helmet on, fitting it, my oxygen mask, and my parish of. she was a woman of color. and i trusted her with nothing
4:58 pm
short of my life. it's not just the pilots. it's a whole crew that got into flying the plane. to sort of sit back and say that those people are not qualified or in fact are qualified because of the color of their skin, their gender, it's patently absurd. it's not the way the military does things. you are trained. you are qualified, and that's it, you're qualified to do that job. kirk whenever finish that college, as far as i know -- junior college, yeah -- >> junior college is great. >> nothing wrong for him. but for him to comment on qualification, it's racism, to say that we should judge the ability for someone to carry out a job or a task based on the color of your skin, it's just sheer racism. >> let's go to the tuskegee airmen, those were black pirates, heroic in world war ii. plenty of equitable heroic black pilots, they work for nasa, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. for me, given the fact that such a small percentage of pilots, three, 4% african american. let's see, 3.4% of u.s. airline
4:59 pm
pilots are black. 2.2% are of asian descent. as you 0.5% are hispanic or latino. women make up just 4.6%. when i say a black pilot, or an asian american pilot, latino pilot, or a woman pilot, i just think, wow, that person has overcome tremendous odds to do a really difficult job. and i'm actually excited and proud to see them. the fact that charlie kirk says he's afraid when against, to sickly, there's been none of the people that i just mentioned, the black pilots haven't caused any airline crashes! that's extraordinary. >> look, you talk about alaska airlines. let's also talk about women here. the pilot who landed that plane was a woman. you know, it's absurd, it's absurd, absurd, absurd, in 2024, joy. you and i have had a lot of these moments where we're not surprised, but awfully shocked. this is a. i mean, this is racism. that's all it is. there is no logical way to defend it. of course, qualifications, ability, and scale, and your learn knowledge of how to
5:00 pm
perform a job have nothing to do with the color of your skin. come on. >> it should go without saying, and that it's supposed to be the idea in american society for these guys. there's a political desire to get a certain type of person all exercised about things. naveed jamali, thank you very much. before we go, i just want to apologize very quickly. i was chatting during a clip that was playing, and you know, we try to keep this show very pg-13. i just want to apologize to anyone who was listening to might behind the scenes chatter. i'm deeply, deeply sorry for that. as you know, it's pg-13 around in here. thank you for watching the "reidout". and "inside with jen psaki" starts now. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ starts now ♪ ♪ ♪ everything is on the table. that's what e. jean carroll lawyer robbie kaplan said today about the potential for more

43 Views

1 Favorite

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on